ABSTRACT
Objective: Microleakage is still one of the most cited reasons for failure of resin composite restorations. Alternative methods to prevent microleakage have been investigated increasingly. The aim of this study is to evaluate the microleakage in Class V resin composite restorations with or without application of surface sealants with different filler content. Materials and Methods: Ninety-six cavities were prepared on the buccal and lingual surfaces with the coronal margins located in enamel and the cervical margins located in dentin. The cavities restored with an adhesive system (Clearfil SE Bond, Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan) and resin composite (Clearfil Majesty ES-2, Kuraray, Tokyo, Japan). Teeth were stored in distilled water for 24 h and separated into four groups according to the surface sealants (Control, Fortify, Fortify Plus, and G-Coat Plus). The teeth were thermocycled (500 cycles, 5–55°C), immersed in basic fuchsine, sectioned, and analyzed for dye penetration using stereomicroscope. The data were submitted to statistical analysis by Kruskal–Wallis and Bonferroni–Dunn test. Results: The results of the study indicated that there was minimum leakage at the enamel margins of all groups. Bonferroni–Dunn tests revealed that Fortify and GC-Coat groups showed significantly less leakage than the Control group and the Fortify Plus group at dentin margins in lingual surfaces (P < 0.05). Conclusion: The all surface sealants used in this study eliminated microleakage at enamel margins. Moreover, unfilled or nanofilled surface sealants were the most effective in decreasing the degree of marginal microleakage at dentin margins. However, viscosity and penetrability of the sealants could be considered for sealing ability besides composition.
Marginal Permeability of Self-etch and Total-etch Adhesive Systems
